Introduction
More than forty thousand merchant ships, and countless number of smaller coastal craft, ply world oceans which comprise nearly seventy percent of the earth’s surface. Each year approximately ten million containers of cargo, containing raw materials to finished goods are transported by seas. The ships are owned by different states, private companies or individuals and manned by mixture of seafarers from different countries, mixed together from various nationalities. These ships are perhaps the most autonomous entities on earth as rule of law allows frequent change of their allegiance or identity by choosing a flag to suit their requirement.
Although merchant ships spend most of their lifetime outside the territorial waters, the current international maritime legal regime is ironically revolved around nationality of the vessel. Every vessel engaged in international trade must register in a country and is subjected to the regulatory control of that country whose flag it flies as per the existing international maritime law. Resultantly, any country has the right to allow a vessel to fly its national flag and to therefore bestow its nationality upon that vessel. When a vessel owner registers a vessel with a nation, the owner agrees to abide by that nation’s law and regulations of that ‘flag state’ in return for protection and the right of its vessel to be of that sovereign state. A system commonly known as “Flags of Convenience” (FOC) has developed, in which commercial vessels register in countries with “open registries” and consequently the ships contain practically no link at all to the flag states in which they are registered.
Freedom of the “High Seas” and the International Legal Regime
Early as the Roman Empire...
... middle of paper ...
...
Deirdre M. Warner-Kramer & Krista Canty, Stateless Fishing Vessels: The Current International Regime and a New Approach, (2000).
H. Edwin Anderson, III, The Nationality of Ships and Flags of Convenience: Economics, Politics, and Alternatives, (1996).
Jeremy Firestone & James Corbett, Combating Terrorism in the Environmental Trenches: Responding to Terrorism: Maritime Transportation: A Third Way for Port and Environmental Security.
Edwin Anderson, The Nationality of Ships and Flags of Convenience: Economics, Politics, and Alternatives.
United Nations Convention the Law of the Sea http://www.cfr.org/international-law/united-nations convention-law-sea/p16396
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of US Dept of Commerce web site, http://www.gc.noaa.gov/gcil_glossary.html
John E. Noves, International Law of the Sea, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40707349
Under the UN 1982 treaty, a state’s territorial sea extends twelve nautical miles from the national coastline (Slomanson 305). Within this area, Ecuador exercises its sovereignty over these waters as if it were a landmass (Slomanson 305). All aspects of the sea are under its control, including the seabed and airspace. Furthermore, Ecuador is allowed to impose laws that regulate the territory and consume resources that lie inside this defined area. Within this territorial sea, Ecuador “must exercise its sovereign power in this adjacent strip of water” (Slomanson 305). Additionally, Ecuador is expected to chart this water and to provide warning of navigational hazards (Slomanson 305). However, Ecuador did not act upon this and was “lax in enforcing it”. In 1951, the International Court of Justice issued this statement in response to a ruling:
United Nations , "United Nations and Convention on the Law of the Sea:Division for Ocean Affairs and the LAw of the Sea." Accessed November 27, 2013. http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/UNCLOS-TOC.htm.
...oups. Ed. Stephen Currie. San Diego: Lucent Books, 2002. 69-83. Lucent Terrorism Library. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 13 Mar. 2014.
Attacks on the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 27(3), 533-546. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00908.x
For the past 200 years, Colombia and Nicaragua have been disputing ownership over the maritime border near San Andrés, Providencia, and Santa Catalina. After originally being under Colombian control, the ICJ extended Nicaragua’s maritime borders. However, Nicaragua’s intentions are purely economic while Colombia’s are more vested in the culture and wellbeing of both the natives and the environment. Therefore, the ICJ should return the maritime sovereignty to Colombia.
The features in the South China Sea (‘SCS’) have become the root of tensions and conflicts in the region for years. Generally, that is the dispute on territory and sovereignty over ocean in whole or in part by countries in region. The case has dominated headlines for more than four decades not only because it complicatedly involves ‘multiple claimants contend over issues of sovereignty’ but also because it raises awareness on the regional security. Additionally, the case, which causes a number of legal questions, is both challenge and interesting regarding International Law legal studies. This essay will approach key elements of the issue as well as discuss on the dispute settlement in light of international law.
The first element of international law is state practice. There are certain behaviors that are regarded as customs once they are practiced by a substantial amount of states over a prolonged period of time. However, it is important to note that this stand...
Copes in his article discusses a 200-mile fishing limit, which was meant to protect interests of coastal fishing nations whose survival and well-being was dependent on the fishing operations at their shores. There are two several reasons why 200-mile fishing limit had to take place. It is believed that coastal nations are greatly affected by other distant water fishing nations, which send large fleets to fish in their areas and, therefore, deplete those areas of fish. Copes proposes that there are mainly two reasons why extended jurisdiction has to take place. The main idea is that coastal nations have the right to have proper access to fish in their waters, where fish won’t be depleted because of others’ use. Besides that, implementation of
a comprehensive research service. Retrieved May 2, 2004, from Terrorist Attack by Al Qaeda: http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/033104.pdf. Gunaratna, R. (2005, September). Retrieved September 2005, from http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/articles/05spring/henzel.pdf. Gunaratna, R. (n.d.).
Ocean shipping probably will meet with the pirates, which could lead to economic losses. Technology How to make the vessel keep efficiency by using less fuel, so company could cut the cost. Environment Wrecking on a rock, meeting with tsunami or rainstorm and so on when sailing. o Five – Forces • Threat of new entrants Low, because of high capital demand. Power of suppliers High, because of the vessels manufacturing, fuel price, and labor cost because these factors are all have no substitutes.
... The cruise ship pollution campaign has been strengthened by the cooperation among organizations that the Bluewater Network petition facilitated. Heightened public awareness, engendered by NGO campaigns, has pressured the U.S. government and the cruise ship industry to respond. If policy changes, such as those presented in the Clean Cruise Ships Act of 2004, occur, the activities of Conservation International may allow the cruise ship industry to comply with environmental regulations while maintaining high profits. The confluence of each NGO’s actions may provide the means necessary for a strong domestic ocean regime. In the absence of international cooperation, a strong American ocean policy is an important step in safeguarding the world’s oceans. Various strategies have allowed NGOs to highlight cruise ship pollution as an issue that can not longer be ignored.
The alleged offence committed in the present case relates to the conservation of the fishery resources in the exclusive economic zone (illegal fishing of toothfish). It was argued that the only offence committed by the Master of the vessel was his failure to notify its entry into the EEZ of the Kerguelen Islands and the tonnage of fish it carried on board, and that the vessel did not fish in the said zone. The Tribunal then applied various factors to the present case, (gravity of the alleged offences, range of penalties imposable under French law, value of the Monte Confurco and of the fish and fishing gear seized). The Tribunal found that the bond of 56,400,000 FF imposed by the French court was not reasonable pursuant to article 292 of UNCLOS. The Application concerning the allegation of non-compliance with article 73, paragraph 2, of UNCLOS was admissible and the allegation well-founded. The Parties were in disagreement whether the Master of the vessel was in detention. The Tribunal noted that the Master was not in a position to leave Réunion and considered that, in the circumstances of the case, it was appropriate to order the release of the Master in accordance with article 292, paragraph 1, of
Michael D. Greenberg, Peter Chalk, Henry H. Willis, Ivan Khilko, Davis S. Ortiz, “Maritime Terrorism: Risk and Liability,” (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2006)
Currently, International system is focusing on issues related with maritime security. Maritime security coxncern with threats that prevail in the maritime domain (Klein 2011; Kraska and Pedrozo 2013; Roach 2004; Vrey 2010, 2013). These threats include interstate-dispute, terrorism, piracy, drugs trafficking, people and illicit foods, arms proliferation, illegal fishing, environmental crimes, as well as accidents and disaster which happen in maritime domain. Thus, generally, maritime security can be defined as the absence of those threats. Meanwhile, there is an argument that inter-states dispute should be categorized as national security instead of maritime security. Thus, there is another definition of maritime security which define maritime security as good or stable order at sea (Till 2004; Vrey 2010; Kraska and Pedrozo 2013: 1). The definition of maritime security from one to another is different as the scope of maritime security is broad and each actor has different point of view on the issue. There is no universal legal definition about maritime security. The United Nation itself only
Several key factors show the degree in which a vessel may be threatened. First, when there seems to be a high level of traffic which may limit a vessel’s maneuverability. Maneuverability can be utilized to avoid another threatening vessel. Heavy traffic also allows for perpetrators to take cover behind other vessels before the attack. Second, the lack of maritime law enforcement patrolling waters has been significant in the growth of the attacks.